- "Creationism" can also refer to creation myths, or to a concept about the origin of the
soul. For the movement in Spanish literature, see
creacionismo.
Creationism is the
religious belief that
humanity,
life, the
Earth, and the
universe were
created in some form by a
supernatural being or beings, commonly a single
deity. However the term is more commonly used
to refer to religiously motivated rejection of certain biological
processes, in particular
evolution, as an
explanation accounting for the history, diversity, and complexity
of life on earth (the
creation-evolution
controversy). In
Christian sects such
creationism is usually based on a literal reading of
Genesis 1-2. Other religions
have deity-led creation myths which are quite different.
In many countries, belief in creationism has decreased as
scientific theories have been presented that support more
naturalistic explanations for the universe and for life. While some
have tried to refute these theories, others believe in types of
creationism that do not exclude all of these theories. When
mainstream scientific research produces conclusions which
contradict a strict creationist interpretation of
scripture, creationists often reject the
conclusions of the research and/or its underlying scientific
theories
and/or its methodology. Both
creation
science and
intelligent
design have been characterized as
pseudoscience by the mainstream
scientific community. The most notable
disputes concern the
evolution of living
organisms, the idea of
common
descent, the
geological history of
the Earth, the
formation of the solar
system and the
origin of the
universe.
History
The history of creationism is part of the
history of religions, though the term
itself is modern. In the 1920s the term became particularly
associated with
Christian
fundamentalist movements that insisted on a
literalist interpretation of
Creation according to Genesis
and likewise opposed the idea of
human
evolution. These groups succeeded in getting teaching of
evolution banned in United States
public school, then from
the mid-1960s the
young Earth
creationists promoted the teaching of "scientific creationism"
using "
Flood geology" in public school
science classes as support for a purely literal reading of Genesis.
After the legal judgment of the case
Daniel v. Waters (1975) ruled that teaching
creationism in public schools contravened the
Establishment Clause of the First
Amendment, the content was stripped of overt biblical references
and renamed
creation science. When
the court case
Edwards
v. Aguillard
(1987) ruled that creation science similarly contravened the
constitution, all references to "creation" in a draft school
textbook were changed to refer to
intelligent design, which was
subsequently claimed to be a new scientific theory. The
Kitzmiller
v. Dover (2005)
ruling concluded that intelligent design is not science and
contravenes the constitutional restriction on teaching religion in
public school science classes.
Creation in early and medieval Christianity
To a large extent, the early
Christian
Church Fathers read
creation history as an
allegory with the spiritual meaning seen as more important than
the literal, without denying the literal meaning.
Perspectives on Science and Christian
Faith
Early Christian Writings In the first century
Saint Paul described Genesis 2:24
as an allegory meaning Christ and the Church, and
Philo described creation as happening simultaneously,
with the six days of creation meeting a need for order and
according with a
perfect number.
Jewish writers such as
Abraham ibn Ezra could be described as
creationists, while consistently rejecting overly literal
understandings of Genesis.
Maimonides
states that parts of Genesis 1-3 cannot be taken literally.
In response to the second century
Gnostic
belief that Genesis was purely allegorical, Christian orthodoxy
rejected this interpretation without taking a purely literal view
of the texts. Thus
Origen believed that the
physical world is ‘literally’ a creation of God, but did not take
the chronology or the days as ‘literal’. Similarly,
Saint Basil in the fourth century while literal
in many ways, described creation as instantaneous and timeless,
being immeasurable and indivisible.
Augustine of Hippo in
The
Literal Meaning of Genesis was insistent that Genesis
describes the creation of physical things, but also shows creation
occurring simultaneously, with the days of creation being
categories for didactic reasons, a logical framework which has
nothing to do with time. For him, light was the illumination of
angels rather than visible light, and spiritual light was just as
literal as physical light. Augustine emphasised that the text was
difficult to understand and should be reinterpreted as new
knowledge became available. In particular, Christians should not
make absurd dogmatic interpretations of scripture which contradict
what people know from physical evidence.
In the thirteenth century
Thomas
Aquinas, like Augustine, asserted the need to hold the truth of
Scripture without wavering while cautioning "that since Holy
Scripture can be explained in a multiplicity of senses, one should
not adhere to a particular explanation, only in such measure as to
be ready to abandon it if it be proved with certainty to be false;
lest holy Scripture be exposed to the ridicule of unbelievers, and
obstacles be placed to their believing."
Natural theology
From 1517 the
Protestant
Reformation brought a new emphasis on lay literacy, with
Martin Luther advocating the idea that
creation took six literal days about
6000 years ago, and claiming that "Moses
wrote that uneducated men might have clear accounts of creation",
though a German peasant listening to a translation would have
different perceptions from a
Jew familiar with
early Jewish language and culture, and Luther still had to refer to
allegorical understandings such as the meaning of the serpent.
John Calvin also rejected instantaneous
creation, but criticised those who, contradicting the contemporary
understanding of nature, asserted that there are "waters above the
heavens".
Discoveries of new lands brought knowledge of a huge diversity of
life, and a new belief developed that each of these biological
species had been individually created by God. In 1605
Francis Bacon emphasised that the works of God
in nature teach us how to interpret the word of God in the Bible,
and his
Baconian method introduced
the empirical approach which became central to modern science.
Natural theology developed the
study of nature with the expectation of finding evidence supporting
Christianity, and numerous attempts were made to reconcile new
knowledge with
Noah's Flood.
In 1650
the Archbishop of Armagh
, James Ussher, published the Ussher chronology based on Bible history
giving a date for Creation of 4004 BC. This was generally
accepted, but the development of modern
geology in the 18th and 19th centuries found
geological strata and
fossil sequences indicating an ancient Earth.
Catastrophism was favoured in England
as supporting the Biblical flood, but this was found to be
untenable and by 1850 all geologists and most Evangelical
Christians had adopted various forms of
old Earth creationism, while
continuing to firmly reject
evolution.
Growing evidence for naturalistic explanations
From
around the start of the nineteenth century ideas like Lamarck's concept of transmutation of species had gained
a small number of supporters in Paris and Edinburgh
, mostly amongst anatomists. Britain at that
time was enmeshed in the
Napoleonic
Wars, and fears of republican revolutions such as the
American Revolution and
French Revolution led to a harsh
repression of such evolutionary ideas which challenged the divine
hierarchy justifying the monarchy.
Charles Darwin's
development of his theory of
natural selection at this time was
kept closely secret. Repression eased, and the anonymous
publication of
Vestiges of
Creation in 1844 aroused wide public interest with support
from
Quaker and
Unitarians, but was strongly criticised
by the
scientific community,
which emphasized the need for solidly backed science. In 1859
Darwin's
On the Origin of
Species provided that evidence from an authoritative and
respected source, and gradually convinced scientists that
evolution occurs. This was resisted by
conservative evangelicals in the
Church of England, but their attention
quickly turned to the much greater uproar about
Essays and Reviews by
liberal Anglican theologians, which
introduced into the controversy "
the higher criticism" begun by
Erasmus centuries earlier. This book
re-examined the Bible and cast doubt on a literal interpretation.
By 1875 most American
naturalists
supported ideas of
theistic
evolution, often involving
special
creation of human beings.
The rapid developments in scientific understanding have led to
detailed scientific and naturalistic explanations for the
properties of both living things and non-living matter (from the
tiniest sub-atomic particles to the development of the planets,
stars and galaxies) which do not require the detectable
intervention of a creator.
Theistic evolution
Through the 19th century the term
creationism most
commonly referred to
direct creation
of individual souls, in contrast to
traducianism. Following the publication of
Vestiges
there was interest in ideas of Creation by divine law. In
particular, the
liberal
theologian Baden
Powell argued that this illustrated the Creator's power better
than the idea of miraculous creation, which he thought ridiculous.
When
On the Origin of
Species was published, the cleric
Charles Kingsley wrote of evolution as
"just as noble a conception of Deity". Darwin's view at the time
was of God creating life through the laws of nature, and the book
makes several references to "creation", though he later regretted
using the term rather than calling it an unknown process. In
America,
Asa Gray argued that evolution is
the secondary effect, or
modus operandi, of the first
cause, design, and published a pamphlet defending the book in
theistic terms,
Natural Selection is not inconsistent with
Natural Theology. Theistic evolution became a popular
compromise, and
St. George
Jackson Mivart was among those accepting evolution but
attacking Darwin's naturalistic mechanism. Eventually it was
realised that supernatural intervention could not be a scientific
explanation, and naturalistic mechanisms such as
neo-Lamarckism were favoured as being more
compatible with purpose than natural selection.
Some theists took the general view that, instead of faith being in
opposition to biological evolution, some or all classical religious
teachings about
Christian God and
creation are compatible with some or
all of modern
scientific theory,
including specifically
evolution; it is
also known as "evolutionary creation". In Evolution Vs.
Creationism,
Eugenie Scott and Niles
Eldredge state that it is in fact a type of evolution.
It generally views evolution as a tool used by God, who is both the
first cause and
immanent sustainer/upholder of the universe; it is
therefore well accepted by people of strong
theistic (as opposed to
deistic)
convictions. Theistic evolution can synthesize with the
day-age interpretation of the
Genesis creation account;
however most adherents consider that the first chapters of Genesis
should not be interpreted as a "literal" description, but rather as
a
literary framework or
allegory.
From a theistic viewpoint, the underlying laws of nature were
designed by God for a purpose, and are so self-sufficient that the
complexity of the entire physical universe evolved from fundamental
particles in processes such as
stellar
evolution, life forms developed in biological evolution, and in
the same way the
origin of life by natural
causes has resulted from these laws.
In one form or another, theistic evolution is the view of creation
taught at the majority of mainline
Protestant seminaries For Catholics,
human evolution is not a matter of religious
teaching, and must stand or fall on its own scientific merits.
Evolution and
the Roman Catholic Church are not in conflict. The
Catechism of the Catholic
Church comments positively on the theory of evolution, which is
neither precluded nor required by the sources of faith, stating
that scientific studies "have splendidly enriched our knowledge of
the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms
and the appearance of man." Roman Catholic schools teach evolution
without controversy on the basis that scientific knowledge does not
extend beyond the physical, and scientific truth and religious
truth cannot be in conflict. Theistic evolution can be described as
"creationism" in holding that divine intervention brought about the
origin of life or that divine Laws govern formation of species,
though many creationists (in the strict sense) would deny that the
position is creationism at all. In the
creation-evolution
controversy its proponents generally take the "evolutionist"
side. This sentiment was expressed by Fr.
George Coyne, (Vatican's chief astronomer
between 1978 and 2006):
...in America, creationism has come to mean some
fundamentalistic, literal, scientific interpretation of
Genesis.
Judaic-Christian faith is radically creationist, but in
a totally different sense.
It is rooted in a belief that everything depends upon
God, or better, all is a gift from God.
While supporting the
methodological naturalism inherent
in modern science, the proponents of theistic evolution reject the
implication taken by some
atheists that this
gives credence to
ontological materialism. In fact, many modern philosophers
of science, including atheists, refer to the long standing
convention in the
scientific
method that
observable events in
nature should be explained by natural causes,
with the distinction that it does not assume the actual existence
or non-existence of the supernatural.
Re-emergence of creationist thought in the United States
In the United States, some religious communities have refused to
accept, as
theistic evolutionists
have accepted, naturalistic explanations, and tried instead to
counter them.
In the United States
the term started to become associated with Christian fundamentalist
opposition to human evolution and
belief in a young Earth in
1929. Several U.S. states passed laws against the teaching
of evolution in
public
schools, as upheld in the
Scopes
Trial. Evolution was omitted entirely from school textbooks in
much of the United States until the 1960s. Since then, renewed
efforts to
introduce teaching creationism in American public schools in
the form of
flood geology,
creation science, and
intelligent design have been consistently
held to contravene the
constitutional separation of Church and
State by a succession of legal judgments. The meaning of the
term creationism was contested, but by the 1980s it had been
co-opted by proponents of creation science and flood geology.
Such beliefs include
Young Earth
creationism, proponents of which believe that the earth is
thousands rather than billions of years old. They typically believe
the days in Genesis Chapter 1 are 24 hours in length, while
Old Earth creationism accepts
geological findings and other methods of
dating the earth and believes that these findings do not contradict
the Genesis account, but reject evolution. The term
theistic evolution has been coined
to refer to beliefs in creation which are more compatible with the
scientific view of evolution and the
age of the Earth. Alternately, there are
other religious people who support creation, but in terms of
allegorical
interpretations of Genesis.
By the start of the twentieth century, evolution was widely
accepted and was beginning to be taught in U.S.
public school. After
World War I, popular belief that German
aggression resulted from a Darwinian doctrine of "
survival of the fittest" inspired
William Jennings Bryan to
campaign against the teaching of Darwinian ideas of
human evolution. In the 1920s, the
Fundamentalist-Modernist
Controversy led to an upsurge of
fundamentalist religious fervor
in which schools were prevented from teaching evolution through
state laws such as Tennessee’s 1925
Butler
Act, and by getting evolution removed from biology textbooks
nationwide.
Creationism became associated in common usage
with opposition to evolution.
In 1961 in the United States, an attempt to repeal the Butler Act
failed.
The Genesis Flood
by the Baptist engineer
Henry M.
Morris brought the
Seventh-day Adventist biblically literal
flood
geology of
George McCready
Price to a wider audience, popularizing a novel idea of
Young Earth creationism, and
by 1965 the term "scientific creationism" had gained currency. The
1968
Epperson v.
Arkansas judgment
ruled that state laws prohibiting the teaching of evolution violate
the
Establishment Clause
of the First Amendment of the
U.S. Constitution which prohibits state aid to
religion. and when in 1975
Daniel
v. Waters ruled
that a state law requiring biology textbooks discussing "origins or
creation of man and his world" to give equal treatment to creation
as per
Book of Genesis was
unconstitutional, a new group identifying themselves as
creationists promoted a "
Creation
science" which omitted explicit biblical references.
In 1981 the state of Arkansas passed a law, Act 590, mandating that
"creation science" be given equal time in public schools with
evolution, and defining creation science as positing the “creation
of the universe, energy, and life from nothing,” as well as
explaining the earth’s geology by "the occurrence of a worldwide
flood". This was ruled unconstitutional at
McLean v. Arkansas in January 1982 as the
creationists' methods were not scientific but took the literal
wording of the Book of Genesis and attempted to find scientific
support for it. Undaunted, Louisiana introduced similar legislation
that year. A series of judgements and appeals led to the 1987
Supreme Court ruling in
Edwards
v. Aguillard
that it too violated the Establishment Clause of the First
Amendment.
"Creation science" could no longer be taught in public schools, and
in drafts of the creation science school textbook
Of Pandas and People all
references to creation or creationism were changed to refer to
intelligent design. Proponents of
the
intelligent design
movement organised widespread campaigning to considerable
effect. They officially denied any links to creation or to
religion, and indeed claimed that "creationism" only referred to
young Earth creationism with flood geology; but in
Kitzmiller v.
Dover the
court found intelligent design to be essentially religious, and
unable to dissociate itself from its creationist roots, as part of
the ruling that teaching intelligent design in public school
science classes was unconstitutional.
Creationist movements
Creationist movements exist among peoples with various religions
perspectives such as
Judaism,
Hinduism,
Christianity
and
Islam.
Judaism and Christianity
Most Christians around the world today accept evolution as the most
likely explanation for the origins of life, and do not take a
literal view of the Genesis creation account. The United States is
the exception where belief in religious fundamentalism is much
likely to affect attitudes towards evolution than it is for
fundamentalist believers in Europe. Political partisanship
affecting religious belief may be a factor because whilst political
partisanship in the U.S. is highly correlated with fundamentalist
thinking this is not so in Europe.
Most contemporary Christian leaders and scholars from mainstream
churches, such as
Anglicans and
Lutherans, reject reading the Bible as though it
could shed light on the physics of creation instead of the
spiritual meaning of creation. According to the
Archbishop of Canterbury,
Rowan Williams, "..for most of the history of
Christianity (and I think this is fair enough) an awareness that a
belief that everything depends on the creative act of God, is quite
compatible with a degree of uncertainty or latitude about how
precisely that unfolds in creative time."
Leaders of the
Anglican and
Roman Catholic churches have made statements
in favor of evolutionary theory, as have scholars such as
John Polkinghorne, who argue that
evolution is one of the principles through which God created living
beings. Earlier supporters of evolutionary theory include
Frederick Temple,
Asa
Gray and
Charles Kingsley who
were enthusiastic supporters of Darwin's theories upon their
publication, and the French Jesuit priest and
geologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin saw
evolution as confirmation of his Christian beliefs, despite
condemnation from Church authorities for his more speculative
theories. Another example is that of
Liberal theology, not providing any
creation models, but instead focusing on the
symbolism in beliefs of the time of authoring
Genesis, the cultural environment, and comparison to non-Jewish
"cosmologies" of that age. In fact, both Jews and Christians had
been considering the idea of the
creation history as an
allegory (instead of a historical description) long before the
development of Darwin's theory of evolution. Two notable examples
are the first century Jewish neoplatonic philosopher Philo of
Alexandria and Saint Augustine of the late fourth century who was
also a former neoplatonist. Philo wrote that it would be a mistake
to think that creation happened in six days, or in any set amount
of time. Augustine argued that everything in the universe was
created by God at the same moment in time (and not in six days as a
literal reading of Genesis would seem to require); It appears that
both Philo and Augustine felt uncomfortable with the idea of a
seven day creation because it detracted from the notion of God's
omnipotence.
However, in the United States, an inversion has happened. Few Jews
today (17%) are likely to accept the
Biblical literal interpretation of the
creation and favor an alternative explanation. However evangelical
Christians have continued to believe the literal claims of Genesis.
Members of Protestant (70%), Mormon (76%) and Jehovahs Witness
(90%) sects are those most likely to reject the evolutionary
interpretation of the origins of life.
The historic Judeo-Christian literal interpretation of creation
requires the harmonization of the two creation stories, Genesis
1:1-2:3 and Genesis 2:4-25, for there to be a consistent
interpretation. They sometimes seek to ensure that their belief is
taught in
science classes, mainly in
American schools (see
Young
Earth Creationism, for example). Opponents reject the claim
that the literalistic Biblical view meets the criteria required to
be considered scientific.
Many religious sects teach that God created the cosmos. From the
days of the early
Christian Church Fathers there were
allegorical
interpretations of Genesis as well as literal aspects.
Types of Biblical creationism
Several attempts have been made to categorize the different types
of creationism, and create a "
taxonomy" of
creationists.Creationism covers a spectrum of beliefs which have
been categorized into the broad types listed below. As a matter of
popular belief and characterizations by the media, most people
labeled "creationists" are those who object to specific parts of
science for religious reasons; however many (if not most) people
who believe in a divine act of creation do not categorically reject
those parts of science.
Comparison of major creationist views
|
Humanity |
Biological species |
Earth |
Universe |
| Young Earth
creationism |
Directly created by God. |
Directly created by God. Macroevolution does not occur. |
Less than 10,000 years old. Reshaped by global flood. |
Less than 10,000 years old. |
| Gap creationism |
Directly created by God. |
Directly created by God. Macroevolution does not occur. |
Scientifically accepted age. Reshaped by global flood. |
Scientifically accepted age. |
| Progressive
creationism |
Directly created by God (based on primate anatomy). |
Direct creation + evolution. No single common ancestor. |
Scientifically accepted age. No global flood. |
Scientifically accepted age. |
| Intelligent design |
Proponents hold various beliefs. e.g. Behe accepts evolution from primates |
Divine intervention at some point in the past, as evidenced by
what intelligent-design creationists call "irreducible complexity" |
Some adherents claim the existence of Earth is the result of
divine intervention |
Some adherents believe in the teleological argument, that the
existence of Universe is the result of divine intervention |
| Theistic evolution |
Evolution from primates. |
Evolution from single common ancestor. |
Scientifically accepted age. No global flood. |
Scientifically accepted age. |
Young Earth creationism
Young Earth creationism is the belief that the Earth was created by
God within the last ten thousand years,
literally as described in
Genesis, within the
approximate time frame of biblical genealogies (detailed for
example in the
Ussher chronology).
Young Earth creationists often believe that the
Universe has a similar age as the Earth.
Creationist cosmologies are attempts
by some creationist thinkers to give the universe an age consistent
with the Ussher chronology and other Young-Earth time frames. Other
Young-Earth creationists believe that the Earth and the universe
were created with the appearance of age, so that the world appears
to be much older than it is, and that this appearance is what gives
the geological findings and other methods of dating the earth and
the universe their much longer
timelines.
According to one recent poll, Young Earth creationist views are
held by as many as 44% of adults in the United States. The
Christian organizations
Institute for Creation
Research (ICR) and the
Creation Research Society (CRS)
both promote Young Earth Creationism in the USA. Another
organization with similar views,
Answers in Genesis (AIG) Ministries based
in both the US and United Kingdom, has opened a
Creation Museum to
promote Young Earth Creationism.
Creation Ministries
International promotes Young Earth views in Australia, Canada,
South Africa and New Zealand. Among Catholics, the
Kolbe Center for
the Study of Creation promotes similar ideas.
Modern geocentrism
Modern geocentrism holds that God recently created a spherical
world, and placed it in the center of the universe. The
Sun,
planets and everything else
in the universe revolve around it.
Omphalos hypothesis
The Omphalos hypothesis argues that in order for the world to be
functional, God must have created a mature
Earth with mountains and canyons, rock strata, trees
with growth rings, and so on; therefore
no evidence that
we can see of the presumed
age of the
earth and
universe can be
taken as reliable. The idea has seen some revival in the twentieth
century by some modern creationists, who have extended the argument
to light that appears to originate in far-off
stars and
galaxies (see
Starlight problem).
Creation science
Creation science is the attempt to present scientific evidence
interpreted with Genesis axioms that supports the claims of
creationism. Various claims of creation scientists include such
ideas as
creationist
cosmologies which accommodate a universe on the order of
thousands of years old, attacks on the science of
radiometric dating through a technical
argument about
radiohalos, explanations
for the
fossil record as a record of
the destruction of the
global flood
recorded in
Book of Genesis (see
flood geology), and explanations for
the present
diversity as a result of
pre-designed genetic variability and partially due to the rapid
degradation of the perfect
genomes God placed
in "
created kinds" or "Baramin" (see
creation biology) due to
mutations.
Old Earth creationism
Old Earth creationism holds that the
physical
universe was created by God, but that the creation event of
Genesis is not to be taken strictly literally. This group generally
believes that the
age of the
Universe and the
age of the
Earth are as described by
astronomers and
geologists, but that details of
modern evolutionary theory are questionable.
Old-Earth creationism itself comes in at least three types:
Gap creationism
Gap creationism, also called "Restitution creationism", holds that
life was recently created on a pre-existing old Earth. This theory
relies on a particular interpretation of . It is considered that
the words
formless and
void in fact denote waste
and ruin, taking into account the original Hebrew and other places
these words are used in the
Old
Testament. Genesis 1:1-2 is consequently translated:
- "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."
(Original act of creation.)
- "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was
upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the
face of the waters."
Thus, the six days of creation (verse 3 onwards) start sometime
after the Earth was "without form and void." This allows an
indefinite "gap" of time to be inserted after the original creation
of the universe, but prior to
creation
week (when present biological species and humanity were
created). Gap theorists can therefore agree with the scientific
consensus regarding the age of the Earth and universe, while
maintaining a literal interpretation of the biblical text.
Some gap theorists expand the basic theory by proposing a
"primordial creation" of biological life within the "gap" of time.
This is thought to be "the world that then was" mentioned in
2 Peter 3:3-7. Discoveries of
fossils and archaeological ruins older than 10,000
years are generally ascribed to this "world that then was", which
may also be associated with
Lucifer's
rebellion. These views became popular with publications of Hebrew
Lexicons such as the
Strong's
Concordance, and Bible commentaries such as the
Scofield Reference Bible and
the
Companion Bible.
Day-age creationism
Day-age creationism states that the "six days" of
Book of Genesis are not ordinary
twenty-four-hour days, but rather much longer periods (for
instance, each "day" could be the equivalent of millions, or
billions of years of human time). This theory often states that the
Hebrew word "yôm", in the context of
Genesis 1, can be properly interpreted as "age." Some adherents
claim we are still living in the seventh age ("seventh day").
Strictly speaking, day-age creationism is not so much a creationist
theory as a
hermeneutic option which may
be combined with theories such as progressive creationism.
Progressive creationism
Progressive creationism holds that species have changed or evolved
in a process continuously guided by God, with various ideas as to
how the process operated—though it is generally taken that God
directly intervened in the natural order at key moments in
Earth/life's history. This view accepts most of modern physical
science including the
age of the
earth, but rejects much of modern
evolutionary biology or looks to it for
evidence that
evolution by
natural selection alone is incorrect .
Organizations such as
Reasons to
Believe, founded by
Hugh
Ross, promote this theory.
Progressive creationism can be held in conjunction with
hermeneutic approaches to
Genesis chapter 1 such as the
day-age theory or
framework/metaphoric/poetic views.
This view of natural history runs counter to current scientific
understanding, is unsupported by peer-reviewed articles in
respected scientific journals, and is considered pseudoscience
.
Neo-Creationism
Neo-Creationists intentionally distance themselves from other forms
of creationism, preferring to be known as wholly separate from
creationism as a philosophy. Its goal is to restate creationism in
terms more likely to be well received by the public, education
policy makers and the
scientific
community. It aims to re-frame the debate over the
origins of life in non-religious terms and
without appeals to scripture, and to bring the debate before the
public.
One of its principal claims is that ostensibly
objective orthodox science is actually
a dogmatically
atheistic religion. Its proponents argue that the
scientific method excludes certain
explanations of phenomena, particularly where they point towards
supernatural elements. They argue that this effectively excludes
any possible religious insight from contributing to a scientific
understanding of the
universe.
Neo-Creationists also argue that science, as an "atheistic
enterprise," is at the root of many of contemporary society's ills
including social unrest and family breakdown.
The most recognized form of Neo-Creationism in the United States is
the
Intelligent Design
movement. Unlike their philosophical forebears,
Neo-Creationists largely do not believe in many of the traditional
cornerstones of creationism such as a
young Earth, or in a dogmatically
literal interpretation of the
Bible. Common to all forms of Neo-Creationism is a rejection of
naturalism, usually made
together with a tacit admission of
supernaturalism, and an open and often
hostile opposition to what they term "
Darwinism", which generally is meant to refer to
evolution.
Intelligent design
Intelligent design (ID) is the claim that "certain features of the
universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent
cause, not an undirected process such as
natural selection". All of its leading
proponents are associated with the
Discovery Institute, a think tank whose
Wedge strategy aims to replace the
scientific method with "a science
consonant with Christian and theistic convictions" which accepts
supernatural explanations. It is widely accepted in the scientific
and academic communities that intelligent design is a form of
creationism,"for most members of the mainstream scientific
community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a
creationist pseudoscience."
Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the
Debate over Intelligent Design, David Mu, Harvard Science
Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.
• "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience
of intelligent design theory."
Professional Ethics Report,
American
Association for the Advancement of Science, 2001.
•
Conclusion of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Ruling
and some have even begun referring to it as "intelligent design
creationism".
ID originated as a re-branding of
creation science in an attempt to get round
a series of court decisions ruling out the teaching of creationism
in U.S. public schools, and the Discovery Institute has run
a
series of campaigns to change school curricula. In Australia,
where curricula are under the control of State governments rather
than local school boards, there was a public outcry when the notion
of ID being taught in science classes was raised by the Federal
Education Minister
Brendan Nelson;
the minister quickly conceded that the correct forum for ID, if it
were to be taught, is in religious or philosophy classes.
In the United States, teaching of Intelligent Design in public
schools has been decisively ruled by a Federal District court to be
in violation of the
Establishment
Clause of the
First
Amendment to the United States Constitution. In
Kitzmiller v.
Dover Area
School District, the court found that intelligent design is not
science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus
religious, antecedents.", and hence cannot be taught as an
alternative to
Evolution in public school
science classrooms under the jurisdiction of that court. This sets
a
persuasive precedent, based
on previous Supreme Court decisions in
Edwards v. Aguillard and
Epperson v. Arkansas, and by the application of the
Lemon test, that creates a legal
hurdle to teaching Intelligent Design in public school districts in
other Federal court jurisdictions.
Hinduism and creationism
Some Hindus find support for, or foreshadowing of evolutionary
ideas in
scriptures, namely the
Vedas. An exception to this acceptance is the
International
Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), which includes
several members who actively oppose "
Darwinism" and the
modern evolutionary
synthesis.
Islamic creationism
Islamic creationism is the belief that the
universe (including
humanity) was directly created by
God as explained in the
Qur'an. While contemporary
Islam
tends to take religious texts literally, it usually views Genesis
as a corrupted version of God's message. The creation accounts in
the Qur'an are more vague and allow for a wider range of
interpretations similar to those in other
Abrahamic religions. Several
liberal movements within
Islam generally accept the scientific positions on the age of
the earth, the age of the universe and evolution.
Islam also has its own school of
Evolutionary creationism/Theistic
evolutionism, which holds that mainstream scientific analysis
of the origin of the universe is supported by the Qur'an. Many
Muslims believe in evolutionary creationism, especially among
Liberal movements within
Islam.
Khalid Anees, president of the
Islamic Society of Britain, at a
conference called 'Creationism: Science and Faith in Schools', made
points including the following: There is no contradiction between
what is revealed in the
Koran and
natural selection and
survival of the fittest. However,
some Muslims, such as
Adnan Oktar, do
not agree that one species can develop from another.
But there is also a growing movement of
Islamic creationism. Similar to
Christian creationism, there is concern regarding the perceived
conflicts between the
Qur'an and the main
points of
evolutionary theory.
There are several verses in the Qur'an which some modern writers
have interpreted as being compatible with the
expansion of the universe,
Big Bang and
Big
Crunch theories:
"Do not the Unbelievers see that the skies (space) and
the earth were joined together, then We clove them asunder and We
created every living thing out of the water.
Will they not then believe?"
"Then turned He to the sky (space) when it was smoke,
and said unto it and unto the earth: Come both of you, willingly or
loth.
They said: We come, obedient."
"And it is We Who have constructed the sky (space) with
might, and it is We Who are steadily expanding it."
"On the day when We will roll up the sky (space) like
the rolling up of the scroll for writings, as We originated the
first creation, (so) We shall reproduce it; a promise (binding on
Us); surely We will bring it about."
Jewish creationism
Judaism has a continuum of views about creation, the origin of life
and the role of evolution in the formation of species. The major
Jewish denominations, including
many Orthodox Jewish groups, accept evolutionary creationism or
theistic evolution. Many Conservative Rabbis follow theistic
evolution, although Conservative Judaism does not have an official
view on the subject. Conservative Judaism however, does generally
embrace science and therefore finds it a "challenge to traditional
Jewish theology." Reform Judaism does not take the
Torah as a literal text, but rather as a symbolic or
open-ended work. For Orthodox Jews who seek to reconcile
discrepancies between science and the Bible, the notion that
science and the Bible should even be reconciled through traditional
scientific means is questioned. To these groups, science is as true
as the Torah and if there seems to be a problem, our own
epistemological limits are to blame for any
apparent irreconcilable point. They point to various discrepancies
between what is expected and what actually is to demonstrate that
things are not always as they appear. They point out the fact that
the even root word for "world" in the
Hebrew language — עולם (Olam) — means hidden
— נעלם (Neh-Eh-Lahm). Just as they believe God created man and
trees and the light on its way from the stars in their adult state,
so too can they believe that the world was created in its "adult"
state, with the understanding that there are, and can be, no
physical ways to verify this. This belief has been advanced by
Rabbi Dr. Dovid Gottlieb, former philosophy professor at Johns
Hopkins University. Also, relatively old Kabbalistic sources from
well before the scientifically apparent age of the universe was
first determined are in close concord with modern scientific
estimates of the age of the universe, according to Rabbi
Aryeh Kaplan. Other interesting parallels are
brought down from, among other sources,
Nachmanides, who expounds that there was a
Neanderthal-like species with which
Adam mated (he did this long before
Neanderthals had even been discovered scientifically).
Prevalence
Worldwide
Views on human evolution in various
countries.
Most vocal strict creationists are from the United States, and
strict creationist views are much less common in other developed
countries. According to a study published in
Science, a survey of the United
States, Turkey, Japan and Europe showed that public acceptance of
evolution is most prevalent in Iceland, Denmark and Sweden at 80%
of the population.
According to a
PBS documentary on evolution,
Australian Young Earth Creationists claimed that "five percent of
the Australian population now believe that Earth is thousands,
rather than billions, of years old." Taking these claims at face
value, Young Earth Creationism is very much a minority position in
developed countries.
A 2008 Canadian poll revealed that "58 percent accept evolution,
while 22 percent think that God created humans in their present
form within the last 10,000 years."
In Europe, strict creationism is less well accepted, though regular
opinion polls are not available. Most people accept that evolution
is the most widely accepted scientific theory as taught in most
schools. In countries with a
Roman
Catholic majority,
papal acceptance of
evolution as worthy of study has essentially ended debate on
the matter for many people. Exceptionally, in the United Kingdom
the
Emmanuel Schools
Foundation (previously the Vardy Foundation), which runs three
government-funded 13 to 19 schools in the north of England (out of
several thousand in the country) teaches that creationism and
evolution are equally valid "faith positions". One exam board (OCR)
also specifically mentions and deals with creationism in its
biology syllabus. However, this deals with it as a historical
belief and addresses hostility towards evolution rather than
promoting it as an alternative to naturalistic evolution.
Mainstream scientific accounts are expressed as fact. In Italy,
prime minister
Silvio Berlusconi
wanted to retire evolution from schools in the middle level; after
one week of massive protests, he reversed his opinion.
There continues to be scattered and possibly mounting efforts on
the part of religious fundamentalists throughout Europe to
introduce creationism into public education. In response, the
Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council
of Europe has released a draft report entitled
The dangers
of creationism in education on June 8, 2007, reinforced by a
further proposal of banning it in schools dated October 4,
2007.
Of
particular note for Eastern Europe,
Serbia
suspended the teaching of evolution for one week in
2004, under education minister Ljiljana Čolić, only allowing
schools to reintroduce evolution into the curriculum if they also
taught creationism. "After a deluge of protest from
scientists, teachers and opposition parties" says the BBC report,
Čolić's deputy made the statement, "I have come here to confirm
Charles Darwin is still alive" and announced that the decision was
reversed. Čolić resigned after the government said that she had
caused "problems that had started to reflect on the work of the
entire government." Poland saw a major controversy over creationism
in 2006 when the deputy education minister,
Mirosław Orzechowski, denounced
evolution as "one of many lies" taught in Polish schools. His
superior, Minister of Education
Roman
Giertych, has stated that the theory of evolution would
continue to be taught in Polish schools, "as long as most
scientists in our country say that it is the right theory."
Giertych's father,
Member of the European
Parliament Maciej Giertych, has
however opposed the teaching of evolution and has claimed that
dinosaurs and humans co-existed.
In the United Kingdom, the
Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, head of the worldwide
Anglican Communion, views the
idea of teaching creationism in schools as a mistake. A 2006 poll
on the "origin and development of life" asked participants to
choose between three different perspectives on the origin of life:
22% chose creationism, 17% opted for intelligent design, 48%
selected evolutionary theory, and the rest did not know.
United States
According to a 2001
Gallup poll, about
45% of Americans believe that "God created human beings pretty much
in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or
so." Another 37% believe that "human beings have developed over
millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided
this process", and 14% believe that "human beings have developed
over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God
had no part in this process".
Belief in creationism is inversely correlated to education; of
those with
postgraduate degrees,
74% accept evolution. In 1987,
Newsweek reported: "By one count there are
some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a
total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) who give credence
to creation-science, the general theory that complex life forms did
not evolve but appeared 'abruptly.'"
A 2000 poll for
People for
the American Way found 70% of the American public felt that
evolution was compatible with a belief in God.
According to a study published in
Science, between 1985 and 2005 the
number of adult Americans who accept evolution declined from 45% to
40%, the number of adults who reject evolution declined from 48% to
39% and the number of people who were unsure increased from 7% to
21%. Besides the United States the study also compared data from 32
European countries, Turkey, and Japan. The only country where
acceptance of evolution was lower than in the United States was
Turkey (25%).
Education controversies
In the United States, creationism has become centered in the
political controversy over
creation and
evolution in public education, and whether teaching creationism
in science classes conflicts with the
separation of church and
state. Currently, the controversy comes in the form of whether
advocates of the
Intelligent
Design movement who wish to "
Teach the Controversy" in science
classes have conflated
science with
religion.
People for the American
Way polled 1500 Americans about the teaching of evolution and
creationism in November and December of 1999. They found that most
Americans were not familiar with Creationism, and most Americans
had heard of evolution, but many did not fully understand the
basics of the theory. The main findings were:
In such political contexts, creationists argue that their
particular religiously-based origin belief is superior to those of
other
belief systems, in particular
those made through secular or scientific rationale. Political
creationists are opposed by many individuals and organizations who
have made detailed critiques and given testimony in various court
cases that the
alternatives to
scientific reasoning offered by creationists are opposed by the
consensus of the
scientific community.
Christian critique
In the article "Intelligent Design as a Theological Problem",
George Murphy argues against the view that
life on Earth in all its forms is direct
evidence of God's act of creation (Murphy quotes Phillip Johnson's
claim that he is speaking "of a God who acted openly and left his
fingerprints on all the evidence."). Murphy argues that this view
of God is incompatible with the Christian understanding of God as
"the one revealed in the cross and resurrection of
Jesus." The basis of this theology is
Isaiah 45:15, "Truly, thou art a God who hidest
thyself, O God of Israel, the Savior."
Murphy observes that the execution of a Jewish carpenter by Roman
authorities is in and of itself an ordinary event and did not
require Divine action. On the contrary, for the crucifixion to
occur, God had to limit or "empty" Himself. It was for this reason
that Paul wrote, in Philippians 2:5-8,
- Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ
Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count
equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself,
taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
And being found in human form he humbled himself and became
obedient unto death, even death on a cross.
Murphy concludes that,
Just as the son of God limited himself by taking human
form and dying on the cross, God limits divine action in the world
to be in accord with rational laws God has chosen.
This enables us to understand the world on its own
terms, but it also means that natural processes hide God from
scientific observation.
For Murphy, a theology of the cross requires that Christians accept
a
methodological naturalism, meaning that one cannot
invoke God to explain natural phenomena, while recognizing that
such acceptance does not require one to accept a
metaphysical naturalism, which proposes that nature is all
that there is.
Other Christians have expressed qualms about teaching creationism.
In March 2006, Archbishop of Canterbury
Rowan Williams, the leader of the world's
Anglicans, stated his discomfort about teaching creationism, saying
that creationism was "a kind of category mistake, as if the Bible
were a theory like other theories." He also said: "My worry is
creationism can end up reducing the doctrine of creation rather
than enhancing it." The views of the Episcopal Church, the American
branch of the Anglican Communion, on teaching creationism are also
the same as Williams.
Scientific critique
Science is a way of knowing and understanding that differs from
others in that it is dependent on
empirical evidence and
testable explanations.
Natural causes can be reproduced so that they can be
tested by other scientists. Explanations based on purported forces
outside nature, such as
supernatural
intervention, cannot be confirmed or disproved by scientists as
these explanations cannot be tested.
Stephen Jay Gould considered science and
religion to be two compatible, complementary fields, whose
authority does not overlap (
Non-overlapping magisteria) For
these reasons some claims of Creationism cannot be evaluated by
science, such as the idea of a divine being as a
first cause. Other, more specific claims can and
have in many instances been tested and disproved by science. The
non-overlapping
magisteria has been rejected by some scientists such as
Richard Dawkins, who hold that
scientific methods disprove religion as an idea whilst disproving
creationism. The scientific consensus is that any attempt to teach
creationism as pure science should be rejected.
See also
Notes
- Evolution Vs. Creationism, Eugenie Scott, Niles
Eldredge, p. 114
- Royal Society statement on evolution, creationism
and intelligent design
- National Association of Biology Teachers Statement on Teaching Evolution
- IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution
Joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67
countries, including the United Kingdom's Royal Society (PDF file)
- From the American
Association for the Advancement of Science, the world's largest
general scientific society: , AAAS Denounces Anti-Evolution Laws
- " Creationism" Contributed By: Ronald L. Numbers,
William Coleman: Microsoft Encarta Online Encyclopedia 2007.
Archived 2009-10-31.
- History of the Collapse of "Flood Geology" and a Young
Earth, adapted from The Biblical Flood: A Case Study of the
Church's Response to Extrabiblical Evidence (Eerdmans, 1995)
by Davis A. Young. Retrieved 2007-06-30.
- Evolution Vs. Creationism, Eugenie Scott, Niles
Eldredge, p62-63
- Science, Religion, and Evolution by
Eugenie
Scott (accessed at 2007-07-09).
- Text of talk by Vatican Observatory director on
‘Science Does Not Need God. Or Does It? A Catholic Scientist Looks
at Evolution’ - Catholic Online
- The Tower of Babel by Robert T.
Pennock, Naturalism is an Essential Part of Science and
Critical Inquiry by Steven D. Schafersman, The Leiter Reports, Report on "Naturalism, Theism and the Scientific
Enterprise" conference, The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion, 11:
God, Science, and Naturalism by Paul R. Draper, Philosophy Now: The Alleged Fallacies of Evolutionary
Theory, Statement on Intelligent Design, Science and fundamentalism by Massimo
Pigliucci, Justifying Methodological Naturalism by
Michael Martin
- Butterflies and wheels article by Raymond D.
Bradley, Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the Simon
Fraser University (New Zealand.
- Creationism/ID, A Short Legal History By Lenny
Flank, Talk Reason
-
s:Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District/2:Context#Page 19 of
139
- A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public
Policy Barbara Forrest. May, 2007.
- TalkOrigins Archive: Post of the Month: March 2006,
The History of Creationism by Lenny Flank.
- McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, Decision
January 5, 1982.
- Edwards v. Aguillard
- Evolution News & Views: Dover Judge
Regurgitates Mythological History of Intelligent Design,
Discovery Institute, Posted by Jonathan
Witt on December 20, 2005 4:43 PM. Retrieved 2007-07-01
- Archbishop of Canterbury, Transcript of
interview with the Guardian
- Archbishop of Canterbury backs evolution: Well,
he is a Primate, Chris Williams, The Register, Tuesday 21
March 2006
- What
Catholics Think of Evolution? They don't not believe in
it, Keelin McDonell, Explainer, Slate Magazine, July
12, 2005.
- See also the article Evolution and the Roman
Catholic Church.
- see eg John Polkinghorne's Science and
Theology pp6-7
- The Works of Philo Judaeus, Chapter 2, translated
by Charles Duke Yonge
- http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/Bible-Science/PSCF3-88Young.html
Davis A. Young, "The Contemporary Relevance of Augustine's View of
Creation" (From: Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith
40.1:42-45 (3/1988)), The American Scientific Affiliation
- Pugh Forum findings Page 95
- The Creation/Evolution Continuum,
Eugenie
Scott, NCSE Reports, v.
19, n. 4, p. 16-17, 23-25, July/August, 1999.
- Wise, D.U., 2001, Creationism's Propaganda Assault on Deep Time
and Evolution, Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 49, n. 1, p.
30-35.
- Who Believes What? Clearing up Confusion over
Intelligent Design and Young-Earth Creationism, Marcus R.
Ross, Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, n. 3, May, 2005, p.
319-323
- A 2008 Gallup
poll indicated that 44% of US adults agreed with the statement
"God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one
time within the last 10,000 years." Gallup
Poll. May 8-11, 2008. N=1,017 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
- Gosse, Henry Philip, 1857. Omphalos: An Attempt to Untie the
Geological Knot. J. Van Voorst, London
- Kitzmiller v. Dover Testimony, Barbara Forrest,
2005.
- Wedge Strategy, Discovery Institute, 1999.
- The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to
Intelligent Design, Expanded Edition, Ronald L.
Numbers, Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, Massachusetts, November
30, 2006, ISBN 0674023390.
- ; Forrest, B.C. and Gross, P.R., 2003,
Evolution and the Wedge of Intelligent Design: The Trojan Horse
Strategy, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 224
p., ISBN 0195157427
- "Dembski chides me for never using the term "intelligent
design" without conjoining it to "creationism." He implies (though
never explicitly asserts) that he and others in his movement are
not creationists and that it is incorrect to discuss them in such
terms, suggesting that doing so is merely a rhetorical ploy to
"rally the troops". (2) Am I (and the many others who see Dembski's
movement in the same way) misrepresenting their position? The basic
notion of creationism is the rejection of biological evolution in
favor of special creation, where the latter is understood to be
supernatural. Beyond this there is considerable
variability...", from Wizards of ID: Reply to Dembski,
Robert T. Pennock, p. 645-667 of Intelligent Design Creationism
and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific
Perspectives, Robert T. Pennock (editor), Cambridge, MIT Press, 2001, 825 p., ISBN 0262661241;
Pennock, R.T., 1999, Tower of Babel: Evidence Against the New
Creationism, Cambridge, MIT Press, 440 p.
- The Creation/Evolution Continuum,
Eugenie
Scott, NCSE Reports, v.
19, n. 4, p. 16-17, 23-25, July/August, 1999.; Scott, E.C., 2004,
Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction, Westport,
Greenwood Press, 296p, ISBN 0520246500
- Intelligent design not science:
experts, Deborah Smith Science Editor, Sydney
Morning Herald, October 21, 2005.
- Full text of
Judge Jones' ruling, dated December 20, 2005
-
http://news.iskcon.com/node/1592/2008-12-27/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed
- Harun Yahya,
The Big Bang Echoes through the Map of the
Galaxy
- Maurice Bucaille (1990), The Bible the
Qur'an and Science, "The Quran and Modern Science", ISBN
8171011322.
- A. Abd-Allah, The Qur'an, Knowledge, and Science, University of Southern
California.
- Judaism and Evolution, Jewish Visrtual
Library
- Aviezer, Nathan. In the Beginning: Biblical Creation and
Science. Ktav, 1990. Hardcover. ISBN 0-88125-328-6
- Carmell, Aryeh and Domb, Cyril, eds. Challenge: Torah Views
on Science New York: Association of Orthodox Jewish
Scientists/Feldheim Publishers, 1976. ISBN 0-87306-174-8
- Schroeder, Gerald L. The Science of God: The Convergence of
Scientific and Biblical Wisdom Broadway Books, 1998, ISBN
0-7679-0303-X
- Jeffrey H. Tigay, Genesis, Science, and "Scientific
Creationism", Conservative Judaism, Vol. 40(2), Winter
1987/1988, p.20-27, The Rabbinical Assembly
- Evolution Revolution, Evolution,
Public Broadcasting Service
- Exam board brings creationism into science
class
- Italy Keeps Darwin in its Classrooms, Deutsche Welle, 3 May
2004
- In the beginning: The debate over creation and
evolution, once most conspicuous in America, is fast going
global, ISTANBUL, MOSCOW AND ROME, Evolution and religion,
The Economist, April 19th 2007.
- The dangers of creationism in
education, Committee on Culture, Science and Education,
Rapporteur: Mr Guy LENGAGNE, France, Socialist Group, Doc. 11297,
Parliamentary Assemble Council of Europe, June 8, 2007.
- The dangers of creationism in education -
Resolution 1580, Committee on Culture, Science and
Education, Rapporteur: Mr Guy LENGAGNE, France, Socialist Group,
Doc. 11297, Parliamentary Assemble Council of Europe, October 4,
2007.
- Darwin is off the curriculum for Serbian
schools
- Serbia reverses Darwin suspension
- 'Anti-Darwin' Serb minister quits
- " And finally...", Warsaw Business Journal, 18
December 2006.
- Archbishop: stop teaching creationism-Williams
backs science over Bible, Stephen Bates, religious affairs
correspondent, The Guardian, Tuesday March 21, 2006.
- Britons unconvinced on evolution
- BBC Survey On The Origins Of Life
- Majority of Americans Doubt Theory of
Evolution
- Substantial Numbers of Americans Continue to Doubt
Evolution as Explanation for Origin of Humans
- Frank Newport, "Evolution Beliefs." Gallup Organization, June 11,
2007.
- "Public beliefs about evolution and creation."
From: religioustolerance.org. Retrieved on November 11, 2007.
- US poll results - "Public beliefs about evolution
and creation", religioustolerance.org
- "99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution" Finding the Evolution in Medicine National Institutes of
Health
- Murphy, George L., 2002, "Intelligent Design as a Theological
Problem," in Covalence: the Bulletin of the Evangelical
Lutheran Church in America Alliance for Faith, Science, and
Technology
- The Guardian, Archbishop: Stop
teaching creationism, Williams backs science over Bible See
transcript of Guardian interview for primary source
References
Further reading
- Anderson, Bernhard W. (editor)
Creation in the Old Testament (ISBN 0-8006-1768-1)
- Anderson, Bernhard W.
Creation Versus Chaos: The Reinterpretation of Mythical
Symbolism in the Bible (ISBN 1-59752-042-X)
- Ian Barbour When Science Meets
Religion, 2000, Harper SanFrancisco
- Ian Barbour Religion and Science: Historical and
Contemporary Issues, 1997, Harper SanFrancisco.
- Stephen Jay Gould Rocks of
Ages: Science and Religion in the fullness of life, Ballantine
Books, 1999
- Aryeh Kaplan, Immortality, Resurrection, and the Age of the
Universe: A Kabbalistic View, Ktav, NJ, in association with
the Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists, NY, 1993
- Stuart Kauffman Reinventing
the Sacred, 2008
- Joel R. Primack and Nancy Ellen Abrams In a Beginning...:
Quantum Cosmology and Kabbalah, Tikkun, Vol. 10, No. 1,
pp. 66–73
External links
Organizations
Young Earth Creationism
Old Earth Creationism
|
|
Intelligent design
Evolution
|
Top topics
Wikis
Quiz
Facts
Map
Search
